ADVERTISEMENT

Davison on BTN: Change practice and be physical

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree with what a lot of what Matt says, but I really don't believe Riley or Langsdorf has any desire for the Huskers to be a down hill physical football team.
 
I like what he said, but I don't think that is going to be the mentality, not on offense. That's not this staff's MO. If anything they seem to excel in the technical aspects of football and their offense and philosophy seem to reflect that.
 
Haven't they put up a lot of points? TA misfires and maybe misbehaviors seem more the issue with O reaching full potential. D is progressing and some higher character level; Go Blackshirts. HCMR has stated the key to winning football is building dominant lines.
 
I like what he said, but I don't think that is going to be the mentality, not on offense. That's not this staff's MO. If anything they seem to excel in the technical aspects of football and their offense and philosophy seem to reflect that.
Completely agree.

To me, this staff is more about finesse. I don't think things are as complicated as what Callahan did, but there is a degree of finesse to what they do. There have been times this year where I have seen a particular play here and there and just went "Wow, how did they draw that one up".

What they really need is the type of QB that can handle the mental aspects of the game. Not so much a super gifted athlete, which Tommy is, but the kind of guy that can see plays develop, instinctively know where his progressions are, and not necessarily think fast, but just kind of know, where to go with the ball.

In some ways, it's a mindset. When you go up to the line, are you only thinking about trying to hit player X on the deep route (this is TA), or is your mindset about visualizing the defensive formation, and instantly knowing how they are going to defend you, which linebacker is blitzing, or trying to fake you out, and what is the down and distance, and where is your mis-match on the pre read alignment.

To me, it's a lot like playing a video game. It happens so fast, you don't really have time to think much about all those different inputs, but just like a video game and with repetition, some guys can start to pick up on those things pretty quickly, to where it just becomes natural.

In short, you need a really intelligent guy back there with good decision making to make this go in Riley's system.
 
Completely agree.

To me, this staff is more about finesse. I don't think things are as complicated as what Callahan did, but there is a degree of finesse to what they do. There have been times this year where I have seen a particular play here and there and just went "Wow, how did they draw that one up".

What they really need is the type of QB that can handle the mental aspects of the game. Not so much a super gifted athlete, which Tommy is, but the kind of guy that can see plays develop, instinctively know where his progressions are, and not necessarily think fast, but just kind of know, where to go with the ball.

In some ways, it's a mindset. When you go up to the line, are you only thinking about trying to hit player X on the deep route (this is TA), or is your mindset about visualizing the defensive formation, and instantly knowing how they are going to defend you, which linebacker is blitzing, or trying to fake you out, and what is the down and distance, and where is your mis-match on the pre read alignment.

To me, it's a lot like playing a video game. It happens so fast, you don't really have time to think much about all those different inputs, but just like a video game and with repetition, some guys can start to pick up on those things pretty quickly, to where it just becomes natural.

In short, you need a really intelligent guy back there with good decision making to make this go in Riley's system.

I don't see Riley trying to be finesse first, second and third like Billy. He wants to establish a spread you out scheme then punch you in the mouth like a good jab sets up the power shot. And Riley has shown that the plays are already there ready to be made in year one. Next year we should be loaded for bear... if we can get a quarterback capable of running his pro style offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker
The mentality of the coaches has to change. Period. Here are season stats that somebody should share with Langsdorf because he simply does not get it.

On third/fourth down of three or less:
Passing: 5/26...19%

Rushing big backs (Cross and Jano): 11/13...85%

Let those numbers sink in. There were 21 drives that stalled this year because we have an offensive coordinator who thinks his cute pass plays will fool everyone instead of running the ball in the power game right at people when it is 3rd/4th and short. When we are so successful running on third and short, why the heck do we throw it twice as often as we run our big guys?
 
Last edited:
The mentality of the coaches has to change. Period. Here are season stats that somebody should share with Langsdorf because he simply does not get it.

On third/fourth down of three or less:
Passing: 5/26...19%

Rushing big backs (Cross and Jano): 11/13...85%

Let those numbers sink in. There were 21 drives that stalled this year because we have an offensive coordinator who thinks his cute pass plays will fool everyone instead of running the ball in the power game right at people when it is 3rd/4th and short. When we are so successful running on third and short, why the heck do we throw it twice as often as we run our big guys?
It's sickening to see those stats and agree, but you aren't going to change what the coaches mentality is. They have been doing it this way for how long? So the only real way to make improvement, is to get the type of guys in who can execute the style of play the coaches prefer.

Heck, even when they tried to appease the fans and run the ball more, it was pathetic. Using the wrong personnel in the wrong plays, and it was pretty obvious that they didn't know what they were doing in a run first type of game.
 
Haven't they put up a lot of points? TA misfires and maybe misbehaviors seem more the issue with O reaching full potential. D is progressing and some higher character level; Go Blackshirts. HCMR has stated the key to winning football is building dominant lines.
IMO having more physical practices than they have already will just lead to more injuries and we don't have the depth to deal with that. They scrimmage full go just as much as anybody. Its attitude not practice routine. TA's turnovers were the largest issues at the end of the year. Plain and simple.
 
IMO having more physical practices than they have already will just lead to more injuries and we don't have the depth to deal with that. They scrimmage full go just as much as anybody. Its attitude not practice routine. TA's turnovers were the largest issues at the end of the year. Plain and simple.
The numbers above show that Langs stupidity killed more drives than even Tommy's turnovers. We gave up the ball 21 times when passing on third/fourth and short.
 
  • Like
Reactions: huskerfan66
For 25 years under TO they ran physical practices. In the early 90s, they took a page out of Miami's practice book from the days of Miami's dominance and started running some 1s against 1s in practice. There were no more injuries than there are now, and we were much better game-time as a result. We rarely failed to finish off blocks or tackle guys to the ground in those days. I believe Solich ended some of the physical practices, and Callahan went to the no tackling in practice during the season NFL approach, which Pelini apparently continued (although maybe not quite to the extent of Callahan). Those changes in practice routine pretty much coincided with the rsie in our tackling and blocking issues. But draw your own conclusions. I have to agree with Matt. Coaches might not change their way, but we aren't going to see much improvement in finishing blocks and particularly in making good tackles without a change in practice routine. And, frankly, I think guys are more vulnerable to getting dinged up in games if they don't get used to making and taking hits in practice. But, maybe I'm just too old and set in my ways to see the genius of playing football without practicing the physicality of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill_Callahan2.0
The numbers above show that Langs stupidity killed more drives than even Tommy's turnovers. We gave up the ball 21 times when passing on third/fourth and short.

You're conveniently omitting bad decisions and blatantly going against Langs when told to run like against Illinois. The fourth and one call against Iowa was as good as another turnover when you don't throw the easy first down to Carter.
 
The mentality of the coaches has to change. Period. Here are season stats that somebody should share with Langsdorf because he simply does not get it.

On third/fourth down of three or less:
Passing: 5/26...19%

Rushing big backs (Cross and Jano): 11/13...85%

Let those numbers sink in. There were 21 drives that stalled this year because we have an offensive coordinator who thinks his cute pass plays will fool everyone instead of running the ball in the power game right at people when it is 3rd/4th and short. When we are so successful running on third and short, why the heck do we throw it twice as often as we run our big guys?

Philosophy aside, your stats aren't correct.

Quickly going through game reports (which I'll admit means I could have made errors), I came up with 10/20 on 3rd and 3 or 4th and 3 passing conversions.

The actual conversion percentage on called pass plays is likely different than the 50% I found, because there were a lot of failed (and some successful) Tommy runs. From the final stats it wouldn't have been clear whether they were designed or scrambles.

Regardless, there were more than just 5 completions converting those downs throughout the year. Fyfe had 3 in the 3rd quarter of the Purdue game alone.
 
For 25 years under TO they ran physical practices. In the early 90s, they took a page out of Miami's practice book from the days of Miami's dominance and started running some 1s against 1s in practice. There were no more injuries than there are now, and we were much better game-time as a result. We rarely failed to finish off blocks or tackle guys to the ground in those days. I believe Solich ended some of the physical practices, and Callahan went to the no tackling in practice during the season NFL approach, which Pelini apparently continued (although maybe not quite to the extent of Callahan). Those changes in practice routine pretty much coincided with the rsie in our tackling and blocking issues. But draw your own conclusions. I have to agree with Matt. Coaches might not change their way, but we aren't going to see much improvement in finishing blocks and particularly in making good tackles without a change in practice routine. And, frankly, I think guys are more vulnerable to getting dinged up in games if they don't get used to making and taking hits in practice. But, maybe I'm just too old and set in my ways to see the genius of playing football without practicing the physicality of it.

@txniner
 
Yeah…we had so many extra bodies this year. We certainly would have benefitted from more contact. :sarcasm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker
This has been an actual issue for around 15 years. But it only ever matters when a narrative needs to be brought to light.
 
This has been an actual issue for around 15 years. But it only ever matters when a narrative needs to be brought to light.

You think Matt is usuing this as a distraction to take attention away from another issue? I'd agree that he wouldn't bite the hand that feeds him since he works games for UNL on the radio.
 
You think Matt is usuing this as a distraction to take attention away from another issue? I'd agree that he wouldn't bite the hand that feeds him since he works games for UNL on the radio.
I have no want to engage you and your agenda. My statement was pretty damn clear. Carry on with whatever it is you think you need to say again and again.
 
I have no want to engage you and your agenda. My statement was pretty damn clear. Carry on with whatever it is you think you need to say again and again.

I don't mind engaging in actual commentary via your original comment. It sounds to me that you think physical practices haven't been here since solich and are now being used to pick at MR? If so, what do you think Davidson is trying to accomplish by bringing it up?
 
The numbers above show that Langs stupidity killed more drives than even Tommy's turnovers. We gave up the ball 21 times when passing on third/fourth and short.
So was Tommy throwing those 21 passes or was it the OC? Do you know what the original play call was on all of those 21 plays and whether or not there was an audible? Do you know if the qb made the correct read on each of those 21 passes? Keep posting stats, it doesn't mean you know anything.
 
Philosophy aside, your stats aren't correct.

Quickly going through game reports (which I'll admit means I could have made errors), I came up with 10/20 on 3rd and 3 or 4th and 3 passing conversions.

The actual conversion percentage on called pass plays is likely different than the 50% I found, because there were a lot of failed (and some successful) Tommy runs. From the final stats it wouldn't have been clear whether they were designed or scrambles.

Regardless, there were more than just 5 completions converting those downs throughout the year. Fyfe had 3 in the 3rd quarter of the Purdue game alone.
You are correct...and I am off here. I need a lashing. Actually, I was looking at our own defensive numbers when it comes to passing the ball on 3rd/4th down. We need huge kudos to Banker and the D here because we held other teams to 19%.

We actually were 13/24 passing the ball on third/fourth down. The point still holds that we are far less successful when we passed than when we ran the big backs, that we passed at nearly a 2-1 ratio, and some drives were killed that didn't need to be killed...but I was wrong at the chance for success.

We also were 6/15 when either Tommy got sacked or we chose to run someone else (like Newby or jet sweeps).

Mea Culpa. The numbers come from http://www.cfbstats.com/2015/team/463/passing/offense/situational.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yossarian23
I have no problems with the play calling on 1st and 2nd downs. Langs is at his best here. The problem is 3rd down...particularly 3rd and short. Matt Davison is right. We need to stop throwing the ball, running jet sweeps, and the like, and simply use the power run game. I don't think we have to have a total philosophical change to the whole offense. We just need to stop with being cute. If we would have done that, we would have won more games this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YouGotSwatted!
The mentality of the coaches has to change. Period. Here are season stats that somebody should share with Langsdorf because he simply does not get it.

On third/fourth down of three or less:
Passing: 5/26...19%

Rushing big backs (Cross and Jano): 11/13...85%

Let those numbers sink in. There were 21 drives that stalled this year because we have an offensive coordinator who thinks his cute pass plays will fool everyone instead of running the ball in the power game right at people when it is 3rd/4th and short. When we are so successful running on third and short, why the heck do we throw it twice as often as we run our big guys?

Edit: I wrote this before reading your latest post.

The stats do not tell a complete story. You left out the third and shorts with Newby. They didn't work. Some of those plays we may have thrown to save clock, especially since you brought in 4th down plays. Since no qualitative analysis of the plays was provided, as in last weeks game, maybe some of these were actually decent calls that didn't get executed. The conclusion you want to draw is that Langs doesn't get it. I am sympathetic to that to a degree, but I think it's just if not more likely that, at least in most cases, he sees something you don't.
 
Last edited:
The stats do not tell a complete story. You left out the third and shorts with Newby. They didn't work. Some of those plays we may have thrown to save clock, especially since you brought in 4th down plays. Since no qualitative analysis of the plays was provided, as in last weeks game, maybe some of these were actually decent calls that didn't get executed. The conclusion you want to draw is that Langs doesn't get it. I am sympathetic to that to a degree, but I think it's just if not more likely that, at least in most cases, he sees something you don't.
Newby was 0-3. Don't run him on 3rd and short. To Langs credit we did not see him in these situations in the 2nd half of the season.
Tommy was 5-11. I imagine most of those six failed rushes were sacks. I don't think Tommy got stuffed on very often on pure run calls.

The point of this thread is that Davison thinks we need to get physical and be able to run on third and shorts regardless of what Langsdorf sees. I think Davison is right in saying a team needs to be able to line it up and run power to the get the first down. I think Davison is wrong in saying we can't do that right now. We showed all season long we can do it (11-13 for Cross and Jano) but we have a guy calling the plays who doesn't believe that.
 
For 25 years under TO they ran physical practices. In the early 90s, they took a page out of Miami's practice book from the days of Miami's dominance and started running some 1s against 1s in practice. There were no more injuries than there are now, and we were much better game-time as a result. We rarely failed to finish off blocks or tackle guys to the ground in those days. I believe Solich ended some of the physical practices, and Callahan went to the no tackling in practice during the season NFL approach, which Pelini apparently continued (although maybe not quite to the extent of Callahan). Those changes in practice routine pretty much coincided with the rsie in our tackling and blocking issues. But draw your own conclusions. I have to agree with Matt. Coaches might not change their way, but we aren't going to see much improvement in finishing blocks and particularly in making good tackles without a change in practice routine. And, frankly, I think guys are more vulnerable to getting dinged up in games if they don't get used to making and taking hits in practice. But, maybe I'm just too old and set in my ways to see the genius of playing football without practicing the physicality of it.
What kind of depth did Tom have with the scholarship numbers he was working with at that time. I venture that he had a few more scholarship linebackers and DEs than we had this year that could play. And it nearly doomed one of his national title chances by banging his QBs up. Even Tom ran people with green jerseys. AND BTW we test for anabolic steroids now. No more "help" staying or getting healthy. Maybe Matt should apply for a job if he thinks he knows more than Riley.
 
The stat sheet doesn't lie. We nearly always made it on third and short with our big backs.
You need to include the defensive set, the game situation and the players on the field for the defense for your stats to have adequate context. You obviously are going to run it more successfully in short yardage situations IF you think or know that the defense is susceptible to it by their personnel, set or the game situation. Stat sheets DO lie. IF you looked at the yardage and Time of possession stats from the Iowa game there's no way you would say they won.
 
Also, regarding the pass plays on 3rd and 4th down that failed to convert. You have to look at what played out to determine the validity of the play call. Were there plenty of open receivers and TA made a bad decision? Did an open receiver drop the catch? If you are going to pick at the play calling, you have to review the actual play itself and determine one by one if the call itself was bad or if it was just a failure to execute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker
I was looking at the stats a few days on the rushing prowess of the '95 team. I walked away thinking the they really could run the ball well...and the play calling was masterful. Now I'm not so sure. I didn't go back and check the defenses that were being run against us. I didn't take into account that maybe someone on the other team just fell down. Maybe Oz called some really bad plays but Frazier was the one who changed it and saved the day. You guys saved me from saying Oz and that '95 rushing offense were awesome! I could have looked really dumb. Thanks...
 
Pretty obvious from the 4th and 1 thread.
Such hilarity coming from you. You got completely smacked around so you ran to your buddy Damon. You used his tweet that said, "He didn't understand down & distance. Poor awareness. Not about reading a defense." You didn't even realize that Damon was saying the EXACT same thing I said earlier. Tommy's problem had nothing to do with "reading" that Carter would be open...he should have gone to him because of down and distance. Once you realized Damon and I were on the same page you went home with your tail between your legs.

If you want to talk in depth about play calls and player responsibilities, stick to baseball.
 
As I recall that thread Tommie boy, HTO owned you with the fact that it was pretty easy to "read" the intent of that backer to blitz and not cover Carter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 94husker
For 25 years under TO they ran physical practices. In the early 90s, they took a page out of Miami's practice book from the days of Miami's dominance and started running some 1s against 1s in practice. There were no more injuries than there are now, and we were much better game-time as a result. We rarely failed to finish off blocks or tackle guys to the ground in those days. I believe Solich ended some of the physical practices, and Callahan went to the no tackling in practice during the season NFL approach, which Pelini apparently continued (although maybe not quite to the extent of Callahan). Those changes in practice routine pretty much coincided with the rsie in our tackling and blocking issues. But draw your own conclusions. I have to agree with Matt. Coaches might not change their way, but we aren't going to see much improvement in finishing blocks and particularly in making good tackles without a change in practice routine. And, frankly, I think guys are more vulnerable to getting dinged up in games if they don't get used to making and taking hits in practice. But, maybe I'm just too old and set in my ways to see the genius of playing football without practicing the physicality of it.

We have heard that the rules have changed. Less coaches, less contact, the whole bit. I think we've heard from former players that we couldn't actually replicate TO's practices now, although we could get a little closer to them than we are currently.

Whether that's enough is anyone's guess I suppose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT